World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
The ceasefire would have happened in return for some of the hostages. Why would they give them more?
Ceasefires end, otherwise it's called a truce. Hamas probably didn't want to give up their strongest negotiating chip. In saying that, keeping hostages in this way is a war crime too.
Negotiating is the only path forward. Netanyahu rejecting the offer outright leads to more death and violence in the short and long term.
If Israel don't negotiate in good faith, why would Hamas stop terrorist attacks? Your rhetoric goes both ways.
Just the short term really. The least deaths in the long term from a game theory perspective is to make the value of the hostages zero or even negative.
Israel's biggest mistake in the hostage back and forth was in the past giving up like 1000 fighters for some hostages.
Instead Israel should occupy like an additional acre of Palestine everytime a hostage/day is taken. Domestically the loss of territory seems to be the only thing that matters to Palestinians, in terms of political support. So they need to take that away.
Your game theory is only considering the lives of hostages in the short and long term. Thousands are dying in the meanwhile.
Thousands more would die in the next war for hoatages if they're allowed to be viable. Long term, peace on the '67 borders is the only way to minimize total casualties.
Hamas has proven over the last 20 years that it will continue to attack Israel no matter what. It's proven that it doesn't care about the lives of Palestinians.
I took agree that peace leads to less death. The question is how to get there.
Hamas are a terrorist organisation who committed a horrible act. Hamas are not in power in the west bank, yet the Palestinians there have suffered apartheid and lose land to Israeli settlers in breach of international law. This is happening for years.
If we look at stats from before October, the loss of lives is clearly on the Palestinians side to a much higher degree. If we look at since October, it's the same.
Hamas commits horrible acts. Israel commits horrible acts.
Keeping civilian hostages as human shields is a war crime. Indiscriminately bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure is a war crime.
Israel clearly isn't indiscriminately bombing Gaza.
That should be expected since only one side spends money on defensive technology. Hamas has been complaining about Israeli air strikes since it came to power. It's spent billions on unguided rockets and ripping up infrastructure. But it's built zero bomb shelters for it's people, even admonishing civilians trying to use the built tunnels for shelter. It's installed zero radar systems. It's purchased zero anti-aircraft guns. It's done absolutely nothing to protect it's citizens and continues to start new wars.
Why would we expect the death tolls to be equal? That's like me, an American complaining that healthcare in America isn't available for everyone like it is for Canadians and demanding that Canada fix that problem.
I would call bombing hospitals and refugee camps indiscriminate bombing. Some people are given warnings. Some are not. So perhaps I should clarify that not all of their bombing is indiscriminate. Much is.
Proportional response and efforts to minimse civilian casualties are required under war conventions. This is not happening.
Your point about only one side having the capability to be hugely aggressive onky bolsters my point. Israel is the aggressor in such a situation.
I am not saying Hamas is a good government. Both sides can be terrible. However, Hamas not building bomb shelters does not make it ok for Israel to bomb citizens indiscriminately.
I don't expect the tolls to be equal. I do however take note that when Israel uses aggressive actions by Hamas for justification, that they are in fact the aggressors in the majority of cases with injury or death.
War is horrible. Civilians die. However, Israel's policy seems clearly, with the current and past events, to be genocide. They are trying to eliminate the Palestinian people from land they want.
That seems to be more because you don't know what the word "indiscriminate" means rather than that adjective being an accurate description of Israeli's bombing campaign.
Actually only the second is required. And the second is happening. "Proportional response" is something that can be required by private party treaty as a peacetime control, but it's not part of the rules of war.
Actually it shows the opposite. Israel could have done what it's doing at any point since the last major conflict and ceasefire in 2018. Their lack of aggression and desire for peace kept them from doing so and they only did so once provoked by a frankly disgusting series of acts that forced them to reconsider the viability of peace with Hamas.
That's the opposite of aggression.
To believe this you must believe the IDF is one of the most incompetent military forces on the face of the planet.
Did you even read the definition you linked to. " not discriminating or discerning; lacking in care, judgment, selectivity, etc "
They are bombing hospitals without care that it is a hospital. They are trying to justify it, but that's not the same as being justified or mindful.
Your next point is that Israel by virtue of having firepower greater than Palestine is good by virtue of not already being on a bloody rampage? We don't reward a murderer for eating in the prison canteen without murdering the other inmates. Your argument is absurd.
I said war conventions, you changed the goalposts and said rules of war. That's a sneaky way to try and undermine my point, which is valid.
Also paying lip service to slight reduction in civilian casualties is not the same as prioritizing.
What justification could you possibly have for the annexation of the folan heights and other areas in the west bank that shows Israel seeking a peaceful solution, which the majority of the international community sees as a two state solution. Israel is purposely undermining that effort in contravention of international law for decades.
Whereas before it was a slow genocide, now it is slaughter. It's. Een poutbrf out in this chain already but it's worth pointing out again that over 50% of the Palestinians are under 18.
The lessons of the Holocaust have been lost to history. It's a sad reflection on humanity that the nation state with those that lost the most are the very same that willfully inflicting the horror in others.
Yes and have you been paying attention to this war? They e avoided hitting hospitals that Hamas is operating out of. Every strike is balanced against their generic goal. There are reports from on the ground of them delaying strikes to ensure that the maximum number of civilians can get evacuated. It's very clear they're not indiscriminately bombing. It's very clear they're being selective in where they bomb.
I never claimed "good", you called Israel aggressive. But they're definitely not aggressive. To keep your metaphor going, if the 4' guy keeps trying to rape the 7' guy in the shower and keeps getting knocked in the teeth, the 7' guy isn't "aggressive" for that. Of one day the 4' guy brings a bat and then gets beat up severely that's still on the 4' guy.
Not being sneaky. The conventions on war define the rules of war. They're one and the same. Nothinf sneaky there, just a lack of knowledge on your part.
They've not annexed the Golan Heights that's still disputed between them and the Rump state of Syria, similarly to the territory that's in the middle of the Hezbollah/Lebanon stuff.
Israel pulled out of Gaza seeking a peaceful solution. Gazans and Palestinians mistook their desire for peace as a sign of weakness and have been attacking ever since.
And last I checked Palestinians rejected a two state solution deal that had 99% of the '67 borders, no settlers and land swaps to give Palestinians more land than they had in 1967.
Strange there are so many dead Palestinians each year from Israeli actions if they are not aggressive.
So you think attaching hospitals is wrong then? Read the news from today. Not a bomb for this one, but an attack nonetheless.
Israel did not seek a peaceful solution.istael has never been at peace with it's neighbours. Any of them. Relations were starting to normalise but that's now hopeless for a long time. Although to be fair, both sides did seem to come to the table in good faith. It was apparent by the end that neither wished to come to an agreement that the other could tolerat. Israel is purposely settling in land that is not theirs to make a border impossible
Again, using your continuation of the metaphor, Israel is the 7 foot guy constantly harassing the 4 foot guy over many years. When the 4 foot guy finally snaps and punches back, the 7 foot guy paralyses him for life.
Yes attaching your military infrastructure to hospitals is wrong, it's a war crime and it's what Hamas is currently doing. It's asking for it to be attacked.
Are they from military actions or are they civil disputes. Every year Palestinians take pot shots at soldiers, fire a few rockets towards Israel,get lucky and kill some people. But that's generally not the converted effort of it's government.
This is an objectively false statement.
also! how's aussiezone's performanace?
.world is buggy!
Great. No issues. Local content. Constant uptime from my perspective. Mod is friendly and transparent.
uh-oh! pls don't try to argue who has more dead. remember that gaza launches approximately 4000 missiles every year towards israel and if it wasn't thx to israel's IRON DOME a whole lot would be dead or worse :c
Both actions and their consequences are important. Neither side is a “good” side. Hamas doesn’t represent all Palestinians. Israel’s policies do, as it’s an internationally recognised state with democratic processes.
Hamas firing thousands of rockets is terrorism. Israel eliminating Palestinians is genocide. Hamas’ stated objective is genocide.
uuhhhhhm hamas is the governing body of gaza tho!
so if israel policids represent all of israel then hamas politics represents all of gaza too!
but yuh, it's really bad! this is totally not Po pi po! :(
Oh and Israel cares so much about civilians lost. Perhaps you should check the numbers of killed and injured people on both sides even before 7.10, to get a bit of perspective.
I mean they clearly do. A cheap and WW2 era artillery bombardment of the region could have killed an easy 200k in a week.
The UN believes a modern conflict will kill about 9 civilians for every militant. Hamas' government last I checked reported about 11k casualties, 100% civilians. If that's the IDF would need to have killed 1,200 Hamas fighters to meet that ratio. Given that there's an estimated 20-40k fighters in Gaza we should expect 180k-360k casualties if the IDF nominally completes their goal of eliminating Hamas military.
The way I read it was a ceasefire in return for some of the hostages. Nobody floats their final offer with the first contact.
Israel needs to reset the value of hostages in the long run. They can't afford for hostage taking to be viable in the long run. And as long as they are successful militarily; there's no real reason for them to budge from their position.